Chennai Orders Court October 2025 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
E.Rajendran vs G.Raja
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Oct-06-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 06.10.2025CORAM :THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE A.D.MARIA CLETE and E.Rajendran ...Plaintiff/Appellant Vs. 1.G.Raja2. G Kothandam ...RespondentsPRAYER : This Appeal Suit is filed under Section 96 Order 41 Rule 1 of CPC to set aside the Fair and Decreetal Order made in IA.No.02 of 2019 in OS.No.275 of 2019 dated 21.02.2020 passed by the III Additional District Judge, Tiruvallur, Poonamallee. For Appellant : No appearance For Respondents : Mr. M.V.Seshachari for R1 M/s.R.Nandhakumar for R2ORDERWhen this matter was called on 25.09.2025, there is no representation for the appellant and hence, this matter has been listed today i.e., on 06.10.2025 under the caption, 'For Dismissal'. Even today, there is no representation for the appellant. Page No.1 of 42. Hence, this appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs. Index: Yes/No 06.10.2025Speaking/Non-speaking Ordergv Page No.2 ...
Santhanam Died vs Ramaswamy Died
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Oct-06-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 06-10-2025CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN in S.A.No.490 of 2005 Santhanam Died Appellant(s) Vs Ramaswamy Died , Respondent(s) For Appellant(s): M/s.S.Kalyanaraman For Respondent(s): M/s.T.L.Thirumalaisamy For Rr3 To 6 R6 - LeftORDERThis petition has been filed to bring on record, Sarasu, Mahesh, Natarajan and Madhu alias Maheswari the respondents 3 to 6 as the legal representatives of st Ramaswamy, the deceased 1 respondent in the above appeal.2.Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 3.Mr.T.L.Thirumalaisamy has no objection in ordering this petition. 4.Accordingly, this petition is ordered. () krk NOTE: Registry is directed to carry out necessary amendment. To 1.Ramaswamy Died , 2.ARUNACHALAM , 3.SARASU , 4.MAHESH , 5.NATARAJAN , 6.Madhu@ Maheswari , V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN J. krk CMP No. 595 of 2012 in S.A.No.490 of 2005 ()...
Jayavel, Vs The District Collector,
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Oct-06-2025
These petitions have been filed (i) to set aside the abatement causeddue to the death of the 5th respondent in S.A. No.543 of 2023, (ii) to bring on record respondents 5 and 6 herein who are the legal representatives of the deceased 5th respondent in S.A. No.543 of 2023 and rank them as respondents 6 and 7 in the said second appeal, (iii) to set aside the abatement caused due to the death of the sold respondent in S.A. No.544 of 2023 and (iv) to bring on record the respondents 1 and 2 herein who are the legal representatives of the deceased sole respondent in S.A. No.544 of 2023 and rank them as respondents 2 and 3 in the said appeal, respectively.2. The learned counsel for the respondents did not raise anyobjection in allowing these petitions and this Court is satisfied with the reasons attributed in the affidavits filed in support of the above petitions. Hence, these Civil Miscellaneous Petitions are ordered.3. The Registry is directed to carry out necessary amendments in the above s...
The Executive Officer Vs Srinivasan(Died),1. Parameshwari
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Oct-06-2025
C.M.P.No.14978 of 2025 in W.A.SR.No.53357 of 2025R.SURESH KUMAR, J.ANDHEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR, J.[Order of the Court was made by R.SURESH KUMAR, J.] The respondent / writ petitioner Srinivasan is no more and therefore his legal heirs have been arrayed as party respondents in the proposed writ appeal. Therefore, in order to accept the cause title since this petition has been filed, this petition is ordered. Registry is directed to carry out necessary amendments in the cause title. [R.S.K., J.] [H.C., J.] 06.10.2025 KST https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis...
S.Manivannan Vs P.G.Elavarasi
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Oct-06-2025
CMP.No.23050 of 2025 in CMA SR.No.55806 of 2025R.KALAIMATHI, J.This Civil Miscellaneous Petition has been filed to condone the delay of 20 days in preferring the above Civil Miscellaneous appeal.2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.3. Accepting the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of this petition, this petition is ordered and the delay of 20 days is hereby condoned. 06.10.2025 kkd https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis...
N.L.Jayakumar(Deceased)1.Sasivadana vs N.L.Manoharan
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Oct-06-2025
These petitions have been filed (i) to bring on record the petitioners 1to 3 herein as Legal heirs of the deceased sole appellant N.L. Jayakumar in the above Second Appeal and rank them as appellants 2 to 4 in S.A. No.887/2023 and (ii) to record the 2nd respondent herein, namely N.L. Padmavathy, who is already on record as 2nd respondent in the above Second Appeal as another legal heir of the deceased sole appellant in the above second appeal, respectively.2. The learned counsel for the respondents did not raise any objectionin allowing these petitions and this Court is satisfied with the reasons attributed in the affidavits filed in support of the above petitions. Hence, these Civil Miscellaneous Petitions are ordered.3. The Registry is directed to carry out necessary amendments in S.A. No.887 of 2023 and list the same on 13.10.2025. bga bga [1/2]...
S.Asha Vs Mr. J.Kumaragurubaran, I.A.S.,
Court: Chennai Orders
Decided on: Oct-06-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 06.10.2025CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ S.Asha : Petitionerversus1.J.Kumaragurubaran IAS, Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, Department of Education, Chennai 2.S.Kannappan, Director of Elementary Education, College Road, Chennai 600 006 3.T.Gomathi, District Elementary Education Officer, Mount Pleasant, Coonoor, Nigiris : Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed to punish the respondents for wilfully disobeying theorder of this Court dated 10.03.2022 in WA No.2809 of 2021.For Petitioner : Mr.J.Franklin For Respondents : Mr.R.Neethiperumal, Government AdvocateORDERLearned Government Advocate for respondents would submit that the orderof this Court in WA No.2809 of 2021 dated 10.03.2022 has been complied with.2. Recording the same, the contempt petition stands closed. If at all the petitioner is aggrieved from and out of the calculation made by the authorities, she is at liberty...
- ‹ Prev
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 39
- 40
- 41
- Next ›